pve_ceph_service_stop

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description fully discloses key behaviors: it's a mutation that halts I/O, dry-run vs execute, return values, lack of rollback, and cmd-safety limitations. This is comprehensive and honest.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is dense but well-organized with labels like MUTATION: and RISK_HIGH:. It succinctly conveys essential info in a few sentences without unnecessary fluff. Minor improvement could be condensing (e.g., merging 'cmd-safety ADVISORY' sentence).

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool has 4 parameters and no output schema. The description explains the return format for both dry-run and execution, the risk involved, and the lack of capture/rollback. It covers the main aspects adequately, though error handling or specific effects on different service types are not detailed.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the default for service, the format of service, and the effect of confirm on behavior. It also clarifies blast radius implications per service value, which goes beyond schema descriptions.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the verb 'stop' and the resource 'Ceph service(s) (systemd unit(s))'. It implicitly distinguishes from siblings like pve_ceph_service_start and pve_ceph_service_restart by mentioning revert via start and focusing on stop operation.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explains the dry-run by default and confirm=True for execution, and details when cmd-safety can check blast radius. It implies usage for stopping Ceph services but lacks explicit 'when not to use' or direct comparisons with restart/start. Still, the revert note provides context for alternatives.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.